Loading...
PC_08-06-97_Meeting_MinutesL� MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on August 6, 1997. PRESENT: Charles S. DcHaven, Jr., Chairman/Stonewall District; John H. Light, Stonewall District; S. Blame Wilson, Shawnee District; Robert A. Moms, Shay nee District; Richard C. Ours, Opequon District; Terry Slonc, Gainesboro District Marjorie H. Copenhaver, Back Creek District; George L. Romine, Citizen at Large; W. Wayne Miller, Gainesboro District; Roger L. Thomas, Opequon District; Robert M. Sager, Board Liaison; Vincent DiBenedetto, Winchester City Liaison; and Jay Cook, Legal Counsel. ABSENT: John R. Marker, Vice- Chairman/Back Creek District STAFF PRESENT: Kris C. Tierney, Director, Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Director; Eric R. Lawrence, Planner II; Michael T. Ruddy, Planner R; Andrew Evans, Zoning Administrator; and Renee' S. Arlotta, Clerk. • CALL TO ORDER Chairman DcHaven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES OF JUNE 4, 1997 AND JULY 2, 1997 Upon motion made by Mrs. Copenhaver and seconded by Mr. Wilson, the minutes of June 4, 1997 were unanimously approved as presented. Upon motion made by Mr. Wilson and seconded by Mr. Romine, the minutes of July 2, 1997 were unanimously approved as presented. BIMONTHLY REPORT Chairman DcHaven accepted the Bimonthly Report for the Commission's information. E Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 78 -2- 0 COMMITTEE REPORTS Development Review & Regulations Subcommittee (DRRS) - 07/24/97 Mtg. Mr. Wyatt reported that the primary discussion involved the Flex -Tech amendments. Mr. Wyatt said that he met with the subcommittee of the Industrial Parks Association to begin the work on this topic. He said that the staff will have a preliminary presentation for the Commission to receive input. Frederick County /Stephens City Joint Planning Committee - 07/29/97 Mtg. Mr. Thomas reported that this committee discussed two topics - -the long -range desire of Stephens City to have their boundaries match up with their Sewer and Water Service Area; and the creation of an Overlay District for wellhead protection for the lagoons and the quarry. PUBLIC HEARINGS: • Conditional Use Permit #011 -97 of Robert R. Sheehan for a Cottage Occupation/ Sign Shop. This property, zoned RA (Rural Areas), is located directly across from 558 Marple Road (Rt. 654) and is identified with PJ.N. 41 -A418A in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. Action - Recommended Approval with Conditions Chairman DeHaven said that he would not participate in discussion and vote on this item because of a possible conflict of interest, and he turned the chair over to Mr. Roger Thomas. Mr. Evans, Zoning Administrator, said that Mr. Sheehan received approval for CUP #014 -89 by the Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1989 to operate a sign shop on property located at 5358 Northwestem Pike (Rt. 50W) . Mr. Evans said that the applicant wishes to construct a residence and a detached garage on property located on Marple Road (Rt. 654), which would become the new location for his business. He said that the garage will accommodate the office and sign shop and Mr. Sheehan will have one employee. Mr. Evans added that the staff believed the use of the property with conditions should not effect the natural character and established pattern of development in the area. Mr. Robert Sheehan, the applicant, said that he has been operating a sign business in the area for about 20 years. Mr. Sheehan said that he plans to do the same type of work, but the new location will give him a little more room to work. Mr. Sheehan said that there is very little traffic involved with his business. Mr. Miller pointed out to the applicant that the permitted sign size for a Cottage Occupation is • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 79 -3- four square feet. No other areas of concern were raised by the Commission. There were no citizen comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Romine, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #0l 1 -97 of Robert R. Sheehan for a Cottage Occupation/Sign Shop with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments shall be complied with at all times. 2. Activity associated with this use, including storage, shall be conducted wholly within the enclosed garage building. YES (TO APPROVE) Miller, Stone, Ours, Thomas, Romine, Wilson, Copenhaver, Light, Morris ABSTAIN DeHaven (Note: Mr. Marker was absent.) • Mr. DeHaven resumed chairing of the meeting. Rezoning Application #003 -97 for Westridge Subdivision, Section I11, by Glaize Development, Inc. to rezone 9.81 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) for 25 single - family detached residential lots. This property is located adjacent to the Westridge Subdivision with access from West View Lane via Middle Road (Rt. 628) within the City of Winchester, and is identified with P.I.N. 63 -A -3 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Action - Reconunendcd Approval with Proffers Mr. Wyatt stated that noteworthy agency comments include those from the Parks & Recreation Department and the Public Schools. He said that both of those agencies have expressed concern that the rezoning would impact regional parks facilities and future school facilities and they have recommended that impacts be addressed. Mr. Wyatt noted that the parcel is located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). He said that the tract was added to the UDA by the Board of Supervisors on July 10, 1996. At that time, the main area of concern was the ability to provide services and the uncertainty of who would provide them. He said that the Commission requested that when the rezoning came before the CotTunission and Board, that staff report on how services would be provided, since the majority of the subdivision was within the City of Winchester. Mr. Wyatt stated that the entire 9.81 acres requested for rezoning 0 Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 80 -4- is within the County and he explained who would provide the various services for the subdivision. • Mr. Wyatt added that access will be by Middle Road within the City of Winchester. He said that the applicant has submitted a proffer statement which includes a generalized development plan and has proffered to provide Frederick County with a monetary contribution that is consistent with the results of the Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model. He said that the applicant has proffered a 50 -foot wide future street connection to the Allen property to the north, which will provide a future connection to Cedar Creek Grade (Rt. 622) within the City of Winchester. Mr. Wyatt said that the applicant has also proffered to provide a consumer notification disclosure for each future property owner which will describe various services provided by each jurisdiction. Mr. Stephen M. Gvurisi n with G. W. Clifford & Associates, the design engineers for the project, was representing the owner, Glaize Developments, Inc. Mr. Gyurisin said that this tract adjoins the existing Westridge Subdivision, which is currently under development, and will have similar conditions as those in existing Westridge, such as paved streets, sidewalks, and lots within the 13,000- 14,000 square foot range. He said that the property is in the County, however, the majority of the subdivision is located within the City. Mr. Gyurisin said that they have been working w th staff towards an appropriate means of notifying property owners that there will be sonic differences in services. Mr. Gyurisin concluded by saying that this was an ideal location for continuation of the existing subdivision. There were no public comments. The Planning Commission believed the rezoning was consistent with the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Policy Plan. They were in agreement with the staff that the monetary proffer provided by the applicant compensated for the negative fiscal innpacl identified by the Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model; that the provision of the future street would eventually provide access to Cedar Creek Grade, following the development of the Allen property; and the consumer notification disclosure would alert future property oNnncrs to the provision of services offered by the City and the County. No other areas of concern were raised by the Commission. Upon motion made by Mr. Romine and seconded by Mr. Light, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning Application 4003 -97 of Westridge Subdivision, Section 111, by Glaize Development, Inc. to rezone 9.81 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to RP (Residential Performance) for single- family dwellings. Amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165 -8211, B2 (Business General) District. The proposed amendment will allow adult retail uses with a Conditional Use Permit. Action - Recommended Approval with Revisions Mr. Lawrence presented the proposed amendment to allow adult retail uses with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). He explained that the Zoning Ordinance does not currently restrict any adult retail uses in •; Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 81 -5- the County. He said that the staff feels it is appropriate to allow these uses in a B2 Zoning District with a CUP. • Mr. Lawrence reviewed the five conditions that would apply to this use. Mr. Miller said that the proposed amendment states that a CUP is required and then lists the conditions to be placed on the permit. Mr. Miller raised the point that it may lead someone to believe that no other conditions would apply or that they may be exempt from conditions that exist in other sections of the Code. It was noted that there is a section in the ordinance that deals specifically with conditions that may be placed on a conditional use permit. Conunission members discussed possible wording changes or the possibility of adding a 6dm condition specifically stating that other conditions may apply. Members of the Commission felt that adding the phrase, "...any conditions imposed by dme Board of Supervisors and with the following minimum conditions" would be appropriate. Commission members also discussed the proposed definition for adult retail. There was a concern that the phrase, "25% or more of stock" should be reduced or changed to a square footage measurement to allow for easier enforcement. The point was made that there are some legitimate video rental concerns that have a percentage of their business in adult material. Also discussed was whether the use could be outright denied in Frederick County. It was noted that this would be infringing on the rights of free enterprise and the County needed to make provisions for the use. Other questions regarding parking requirements, the 2,500 foot distance from adjoining properties, and clarification of the term, "adult' by age was also discussed. It was also suggested that the term, "multi- tenant' instead of "multi-use" be used under Condition #2. •!. Mr. Tierney stated.that under the existing ordinance, adult retail uses are neither defined or regulated, which has made it awkward for County agencies to deal with this issue. He said that there are legitimate businesses, some of which are national chains, within the County who have a portion of their trade in adult videos. He said that it was not the staffs intent to regulate or restrict those routine establishments who carry this material and tend not to generate complaints. He explained that there is also the other end of the spectrum, however, where shops deal solely in this type of material and those are the shops that the problems and complaints tend to come from. He said that the staff is attempting to create a way to differentiate the two and to get a handle on those extreme establishments. Mr. Tierney added that the CUP allows a lot of flexibility on the part of the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to deal with uses on a case by case basis and it also allows them the prerogative to deny the CUP, if they feel the location is not appropriate. He felt that the wording of the amendment should not be so restrictive that it becomes unmanageable or does not allow review on a case by case basis. There were no public comments. • Mr. Miller moved for approval of the amendment with clarification of the lead -in statement as previously stated and the term "multi - tenant" instead of "multi -use' buildings under Condition Q. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Copenhaver. Mr. Thomas moved to propose an amendment to die motion that would change the "25 percent' to "50 square feet of floor area" under the adult retail definition. This motion was seconded by Mr. Morris, however, the amended motion was not accepted by Mr. Miller or Mrs. Copenhaver and Chairman DeHaven Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 82 -6- C� declared Mr. Thomas's motion out of order. Mr. Miller's original motion was back on the floor and was approved by the following majority vote: YES (TO APPROVE) Miller, Stone, Ours, Romine, Copenhaver, Light, Morris, DeHaven NO: Thomas, Wilson (Mr. Marker was absent.) BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Corunission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the amendment to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article X, Business and Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 165 -82B, B2 (Business General) District to allow adult retail uses with a Conditional Use Permit as follows: Standard Industrial Allowed Uses Classification (SIC) Conditional Uses Uses permitted with a conditional use permit shall be as follows: Adult Retail uses meeting the minimum requirements of this chapter, any conditions - - -- imposed by the Board of Supervisors, and with the following minimum conditions: (1) Such uses shall be located at least 2,500 feet from the property line of existing adult retail uses, schools, churches, parks, day care facilities, and residential uses and districts. (2) Such uses shall not be permitted in shopping centers and/or multi- tenant buildings. (3) All merchandise display areas shall be limited to enclosed structures, and shall not be visible from the outside. (4) Business signs shall not exceed a maximum of 25 square feet. No wall mounted signs or window displays shall be permitted. (5) Hours of operation shall be limited to between 9:00 AM and 11:00 PM. • Definition: ADULT RETAIL - A retail establishment for which 25 percent or more of its stock in trade, as determined by floor area, is in videos, magazines, books, publications, tapes, films, or other periodicals and paraphernalia which are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on depicting or describing specified sexual conduct or specified anatomical areas. Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 83 -7- • Amendments to the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning, Article XVI, IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District. These amendments are intended to improve the clarity of existing requirements through the comprehensive revision of this article. Action - Recommended Approval Mr. Wyatt said that the proposed amendments reflect a comprehensive revision of the Interstate Area Overlay District. He said that noteworthy revisions include the review of qualifying uses as described by the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (SIC) in lieu of primary or accessory uses, clarification of the total number of tall signs permitted by the Overlay District, clarification regarding the permitted square footage for tall signs, requirements for greater sign setbacks if adjoining properties are residential, notification of the potential for additional setback and spacing requirements, additional requirements for sign illumination, and a description of the various Interstate 81 Exits. All other revisions are editorial in nature, intended to clarify and simplify. No areas of concern were raised by the Commission. There were no public comments. Upon motion made by Mr. Miller and seconded by Mr. Ours, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Planning Commission does hereby unanimously recommend approval of the comprehensive revision of Article XVI, IA (Interstate Area) Overlay District, of the Frederick • : County Code, Chapter 165, Zoning. OTHER Update on Woodbrook Village Master Development Plan Mr. Charles W. Maddox, Jr. with G. W. Clifford & Associates, the design engineers for the Woodbrook Village Master Development Plan project, said that approximately three weeks ago, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Woodbrook Village Plan subject to a VDOT recommended solution to the left turn traffic problem at Opequon Church Lane and U.S. Rt. 11. Mr. Maddox said that he was present to report back to the Commission the response received from VDOT's traffic signal engineers from Staunton. Mr. Maddox said that a meeting was held between VDOT, the Planning Staff, G.W. Clifford & Associates Staff, and the Woodbrook Village property ohhmers regarding those recommendations. Mr. Maddox reported that the traffic signal engineers believed that the ultimate traffic flow generated after the Woodbrook Project was complete would not justify stopping all the traffic on U.S. Rt. 1 I and allowing for a left -hand turn lane. He said the engineers stated that Route 11 was one of the most heavily traveled roads in the area and it was not their recommendation to manipulate traffic in order to handle a very small segment He said the engineers also noted that the commercial turn lanes from the 7-11 Store would also create conflict points, if die) hverc to implement a stop - lighted intersection on Opequon Church Lane. He said that the C� Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 84 t� • solution proposed was to increase the signalization at the interchange without installing additional traffic heads. The south bound traffic coming on Valley Avenue at the Shawnee Drive light would stop before the north bound traffic. The north bound traffic will continue to move and will allow for gaps to be created in the traffic, allowing motorists on Opequon Church Lane to make a left turn. He reported that VDOT felt this was not an absolute solution, but it would help the situation. He said that it allows the motorists on Opequon Church Lane who want to turn left to perhaps have the opportunity to turn left; it doesn't guarantee it. Mr. Maddox said that discussion also took place regarding the future status of the road, in light of it becoming a service road to a historical use, which would increase the traffic flow, and possible solutions were offered. He added that a written report from the Staunton District Traffic Division of VDOT has been promised to the Planning Staff by the end of the month. Members of the Commission asked if the southbound traffic from the 7 -11 Store would still impede on north -bound traffic. Mr. Maddox replied that it would, but it was pointed out that the traffic turning left out of Opequon Church Lane does not have a green light right to turn left, it still has to turn left under caution conditions. The question was raised about the possibility of blocking the south -bound exit out of the 7 -11 Store and bringing that out on the Opequon Church Lane. Mr. Maddox replied that the legality of doing that was discussed and they had planned to ask the 7-11 Store representatives if they would be willing to do that. Mr. James Vickers of Oakcrest Builders, the developer for the Woodbrook Village project, stated that six VDOT officials attended the meeting to discuss this matter. Mr. Vickers said that the recommendation was to control the traffic to allow a gap to permit the Opequon Church Lane motorists the opportunity to make a left -hand turn. He said that VDOT opted not to place a traffic light there because the proposed development would not generate enough traffic that would require one. Mr. Vickers spoke about the number of units proposed • and the percentage of property owners who would have two vehicles. He believed the proposed project would have less traffic impact than almost any other type of IZP project that could be proposed. Mr. Vickers believed that VDOT was comfortable with what was achieved as a solution to that traffic problem; even though it's not a perfect solution, it allowed the opportunity to make that left -hand turn. Chairman DeHaven said that the Planning Commission's recommendation was contingent on a signalized interchange and without that, which obviously was not going to happen, the Commission's recommendation for approval is null and void. Chairman DeHaven asked Mr. Jay Cook, legal counsel, if this was a significant enough change that it should be re- advertised. Mr. Cook's response was that it was not necessary to rc- advertise. Chaimnan DcHaven said that the Planning Commission's recommendation would be clarified at their next meeting. • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 85 9- i ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed and the meeting adjoumed at 8:30 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, 46is C. _T6YweyIcdxktary I(/\ Char es S. DeHaven, Chairman (Jr.) • • Frederick County Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 1997 Page 86